Description: PART 1. Law and the Individual ISSUE 1. Do Standardless Manual Recounts Violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the U.S. Constitution? YES: U.S. Supreme Court, from Per Curium Opinion, George W. Bush et al. v. Albert Gore, Jr., et al., U.S. Supreme Court (December 12, 2000) NO: John Paul Stevens, from Dissenting Opinion, George W. Bush et al. v. Albert Gore, Jr., et al., U.S. Supreme Court (December 12, 2000) The U.S. Supreme Court, in a per curium decision, rules that Florida's manual recounting of ballots in the 2000 presidential election failed to satisfy the basic constitutional requirements of equal treatment and fundamental fairness. Supreme Court justice John Paul Stevens, dissenting from the Court's decision, asserts that the manner by which presidents are elected is the responsibility of each individual state and that Florida's ballot recount was not limited by federal laws. ISSUE 2. Is Abortion Protected by the Constitution? YES: Sandra Day O'Connor, from Majority Opinion, Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania et al. v. Casey et al., U.S. Supreme Court (1992) NO: William H. Rehnquist, from Dissenting Opinion, Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania et al. v. Casey et al., U.S. Supreme Court (1992) Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O'Connor upholds a woman's constitutional right to abortion under most circumstances and reaffirms the central holding of Roe v. Wade. Supreme Court chief justice William H. Rehnquist argues that Pennsylvania regulations on abortion should be upheld and that it is appropriate to overrule Roe v. Wade. ISSUE 3. Are Restrictions on Physician-Assisted Suicide Constitutional? YES: William H. Rehnquist, from Majority Opinion, Washington et al. v. Glucksberg et al., U.S. Supreme Court (June 26, 1997) NO: Stephen Reinhardt, from Majority Opinion, Compassion in Dying v. State of Washington, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1996) Supreme Court chief justice William H. Rehnquist rules that although patients have the right to refuse life-sustaining treatment, physician-assisted suicide is not constitutionally protected. Judge Stephen Reinhardt argues that forbidding physician-assisted suicide in the cases of competent, terminally ill patients violates the due process clause of the Constitution. ISSUE 4. Do People Have a Legal Right to Clone Themselves? YES: Cass Sunstein, from The Constitution and the Clone, in Martha C. Nussbaum and Cass R. Sunstein, eds., Clones and Clones: Facts and Fantasies About Human Cloning (W. W. Norton, 1998) NO: Cass Sunstein, from The Constitution and the Clone, in Martha C. Nussbaum and Cass R. Sunstein, eds., Clones and Clones: Facts and Fantasies About Human Cloning (W. W. Norton, 1998) Professor of law and political science Cass Sunstein, writing as fictional Supreme Court justice Monroe, argues that the right to cloning is analogous to established rights of reproductive privacy and autonomy and is therefore constitutionally protected. Professor of law and political science Cass Sunstein, writing as fictional Supreme Court justice Winston, argues that the constitutional protection of reproductive choice does not extend to the decision to replicate oneself. ISSUE 5. Does the Sharing of Music Files Through the Internet Violate Copyright Laws? YES: Robert R. Beezer, from Majority Opinion, A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (February 12, 2001) NO: Jessica Litman et al., from Brief Amicus Curiae of Copyright Law Professors in Support of Reversal, Napster, Inc. v. A&M Records, Inc. and Napster, Inc. v. Jerry Leiber et al., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (August 2000) U.S. Circuit Court judge Robert R. Beezer upholds the ruling that Napster, Inc., by facilitating the cop

Please Wait